← New search

2012 Toyota Prius C

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

Limited comparison data

There is not enough comparable history to draw a useful model-year comparison.

About this comparison →

How this year compares

Owner complaints by model year

Other model years Selected year
Compare all Prius C years →

Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.

What owners reported most

All reported categories

Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

36 reports with mileage · 27 unknown

NHTSA’s mileage field refers to the reported incident, not necessarily the filing date. This shows report counts, not the likelihood of a failure.

What to inspect

Issues worth paying extra attention to based on owner reports.

  • Service Brakes. Review the 26 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Electrical System. Review the 14 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Air Bags. Review the 7 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

8 crash reports1 fire reports5 injury reports

Exterior Lighting complaints

3 reports
Clear category filter
100,250 miles · Aug 5, 2019
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting

I'VE HAD TO REPLACE THE LIGHT BULB ON MY PASSENGER SIDE HEADLIGHT CONSTANTLY OVER THE PAST COUPLE OF MONTHS. I HEARD THAT THERE WAS A RECALL ON THE WIRING HARNESS OF THE 2012 REGULAR PRIUS AND I'M WONDERING IF THE ISSUE HAS BEEN LOOKED AT IN THE PRIUS C MODELS.

NHTSA ODI #11241674

92,000 miles · Dec 20, 2018
Exterior Lighting

THE LOW BEAM HEAD LIGHTS BOTH FAIL WHILE DRIVING ON THE FREEWAY AT NIGHT. THE ROAD WENT TO TOTAL DARKNESS. I FEEL LUCKY THE HIGH BEAMS WERE STILL WORKING. I HAVE TAKEN THE PRIUS C TO THE SHOP AND HAVE BEEN TOLD THE HEADLIGHT ASSEMBLY ON DRIVERS AND PASSENGERS HAVE MELTED. THE WILL HAVE TO BE REPLACED.

NHTSA ODI #11162799

28,000 miles · Jun 15, 2016
Exterior Lighting

2012 PRIUS C BOTH REAR TAIL LIGHTS FILLED WITH WATER AND FAIL - TRUE SAFETY HAZARD - NO RESPONSE FROM TOYOTA BUT THERE ARE 100'S OF COMPLAINTS ON USER SITES.

NHTSA ODI #10874360

Official recalls

0

No recalls in this snapshot.

Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗

NHTSA investigations

2

DP22005 · Pedestrian Alert Sounds

Opened Jan 27, 2023 · Closed Aug 7, 2023

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Electrical System:propulsion System

NHTSA received a petition on or about July 18, 2022, requesting that Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 141 be applied to all electric and hybrid vehicles operating in the United States. The petition can be reviewed at NHTSA.gov under ODI Number 11486072. FMVSS 141 establishes performance requirements for pedestrian alert sounds for motor vehicles. The standard applies to hybrid and electric vehicles that have a gross vehicle weight rating of 4,536 KG or less or are defined as low-speed vehicles. The standard became fully applicable to all such vehicles manufactured on or after March 1, 2021.On January 27, 2023, NHTSA opened Defect Petition (DP) 22-005 to evaluate the subject matter described in the petition. On June 24, 2023 and as supplemented on June 25, 2023, the petitioner notified NHTSA he was withdrawing his petition. The petitioner indicated that, based on his review of data, there is no justification for asserting potential benefits that could be derived from actions sought by my petition. Based on the petitioner's withdrawal, DP22-005 is closed. Closure of this DP does not represent a determination by NHTSA regarding the subject matter of the petition.

DP13002 · Drivability, Service Brake Failure

Opened Mar 18, 2013 · Closed Jul 25, 2014

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Service Brakes

On January 3, 2013, NHTSA received a letter (ODI No. 10487746) from Ms. Jessie A. Powell petitioning the agency to investigate drivability and braking concerns in the subject vehicle.The petition expressed two concerns: 1. The first software problem was when the vehicle shifted from battery to motor and caused such impact, I initially believed the vehicle had been struck in the rear.2. The next more alarming problem was NO BRAKES. The brake pedal traveled to the floor and a dashboard warning light flashed.This symptom occurred twice, leading to the vehicle being towed to the dealership, the second time in the dealership parking lot after diagnostics of the first incident.After a test drive and vehicle inspection, no actionable problem was found within the petitioner?s vehicle.The braking concern reported turned out to be normal vehicle operation.The petitioner identified other complaints of poor braking performance and low brake pedal received by NHTSA concerning Prius models. Broader review of the consumer complaints reported for all variants of the subject vehicle showed no indication that either the reported jolting sensation or the brake performance concerns reported are occurring in this vehicle population at a level that would require investigative action by NHTSA.The following recalls by Toyota were to address many of these complaints in Prius variants. Neither of these recalls is applicable to Ms. Powell?s 2012 Prius C: 1. Recall 10V-039 March 5, 2010 - 2010 Prius, Lexus HS - Reprogramming ABS ECU - Improve Antilock brake function over bumpy surfaces. 2. Recall 13V-235 August 7, 2013 - 2010 Prius, Lexus HS - Replace Brake Booster / Pump assembly - Low brake pedal due to nitrogen bubble in hydraulic portion of brake system. In the Agency?s view, additional investigation is unlikely to result in a finding that a defect related to motor vehicle safety exists in the subject vehicles.Therefore, given the need to allocate and prioritize NHTSA limited resources to best accomplish the Agency?s safety mission, the petition is denied.This action does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.The Agency will take further action if warranted by future circumstances.More details concerning our review can be found in the Federal Register Notice for this action.